About your Search

20121101
20121130
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11 (some duplicates have been removed)
to the attacks from the israeli side. this is the challenge egyptians negotiate with the u.n. officials today including the secretary-general as well as turkey's prime minister and regional leaders participating in these talks. tamron. >> we got information in from the white house that following his dinner tonight, president barack obama called president morsi of egypt. he spoke with the israeli prime minister netanyahu of israel getting an update on the situation as it stands in more detail from the white house indicating president obama called morsi. the two leaders discussed wayed to de-escalate the situation in gaza, and the president underscored the necessity of hamas ending fire into israel. that's the latest information. thank you. as i mentioned, more than 100 rockets have been fired from gaza into southern israel. you heard ayman refer to that happening today alone. many rockets fired into israel have been intercepted by the country's missile defense system. it is known as the iron dome. nbc news correspondent stephanie gosk joins me from tel aviv. this missile defense that we talk s
aviv as hopes grow for a mediation effort led by the u.n. attorney general. back at home congressional leaders start a fiscal cliff conversation before a post election vacation. will they have anything to be thankful for when everyone gets back to work and the clock really starts ticking? good morning from washington. it's monday, november 19, 2012, and this is "the daily rundown." no, it's not chuck todd. the president is in cambodia this morning, his final stop on a three nation tour of southeast asia. after wrapping up the first trip to myanmar by a sitting u.s. president, chuck joins us now with the latest on the president's trip. >> well, good morning. i'm here in myanmar, a country that just a few years ago was virtually isolated from the world's community and now a united states president has visited the country, barack obama. he made a whirlwind 12 hours count when he landed and touched down he was greeted by a sea of folks here, some of them locals looked spontaneous. some of them uniformed schoolchildren, looked like it was very organized. but throngs of people hoping to catc
politically charged controversy is over u.n. ambassador susan rice's comments five days after the attack. why she blamed it on benghazi demonstrations, officials now say didn't even happen. and why she didn't mention terrorist forces? intelligence officials now believe actually targeted the u.s. consulate there. democrats emerge saying the answer was simple, she was using these unclassified cia talking points which omitted mention of extremist elements because it was still classified and could have compromised intelligence sources. >> she used the unclassified talking points that were signed off on by the entire intelligence community, so criticisms of her are completely unwarranted. >> reporter: democrats accuse republicans of unnecessarily assassinating rice's character. >> to select ambassador rice because she used an unclassified talking point, to say that she is unqualified to be secretary of state i think is a mistake. >> reporter: but republicans say the problem is rice freelanced. >> she went beyond that. and she even mentioned that under the leadership of barack obama we have decimat
right now. meanwhile after petraeus' testimony before congress, a big battle is brewing over u.n. ambassador susan rice's declassified talking points on the attack in benghazi. specifically why the role of terrorism wasn't reflected in them. democratic senator dianne feinstein, the chairwoman of the senate intelligence committee, says she'll investigate why the terrorist role wasn't included. still in an appearance on nbc's meet the press, feinstein said she was sure the white house didn't change the language in those talking points. >> with the allegation that the white house changed those talking points, that is false. there's only one thing that was changed. and i checked into this. i believe it to be absolute fact. and that was the word counsel was changed to mission. that's the only change that anyone in the white house made. and i have checked this out. >> republicans are accusing the obama administration of a cover-up and want ambassador rice to testify before congress. >> it's going to be one tough confirmation hearing. all right coming up, president obama on his way to c
committee. congressman, good morning. >> good morning, chris. >> u.n. representative cole sent a letter to president morsi asking him to refrain from giving hamas cover to intensify its attacks by allowing egyptian delegations to visit gaza. of course, morsi has been a major player in these truce negotiations. do you think he's sending a mixed message? >> well, he is sending a mixed message. you know, i hope that president morsi is able to play a constructive role. but when high-level delegations of egyptians go into gaza under the pretense of a cease-fire and then terrorist groups violate that cease fire, if israel were to defend itself and members of the delegation was tragically hurt in that attack, we do not want that to be used as a pretense to violate the egyptian/israeli peace treaty. one other thing on this, chris. look, there's a fundamental truth here. i was on the border of gaza and israel in august of 2005 when israel unilaterally and without any preconditions left gaza. actually went in and asked jews this in there to leave. they said here is the land, build something with
was removed from u.n. ambassador susan rice's talking points. in the days following the deadly assault, rice said administration believed the attack was a reaction to an anti-islamic video. but, an associated press report says former cia director david petraeus testified on friday that he believed all along that the attack on the consulate was a terrorist strike. >> so let's -- before we set up these clips, let's make sure we set this up right. so we've been hearing, mark halperin, that susan rice said what she said because she was reading straight intel from the cia. we find out from david tet pet trace, this isn't true. that immediately david petraeus and intel officials knew this was an al qaeda attack. right? >> it's still kind of confusing. >> i'm basing that on "the new york times" reports and everything that i read through the weekend. >> totality of the reporting is there was another line coming out of the closed hearing was that they didn't want to say everything they knew in public because they didn't want the terrorists to know that tus government was on to them. >> i heard that.
that has nothing to do with health food. >> it's turning into a proxy war between senator john mccain and u.n. ambassador susan rice. top intelligence officials say they knew from the beginning that terrorism was involved in the attacks but kept rice's comments vague to avoid compromising future legal proceedings. they knew terrorism was involved but didn't know whether the attacks were planned in advance and they didn't have the suspect's identity. still, many house repub cans are saying he's unfit to succeed secretary clinton at the state department. >> i'm just curious. john heilman, first of all -- >> elizabeth warren. >> let's just say what happened, okay? the president's punch line was al qaeda is on the run, blah, blah, blah. they politicized intel. guess what, white houses do that. i'm not shocked, i'm not stunned. i wish they wouldn't have done it. but how do you protect americans in the future and what happened after the ambassador was already killed? but how long has susan rice been in public service, like since her 20s, right? >> a long time. >> so we actually have people on capit
a republican administration, in iraq? how about the failures of intelligence about reporting to the u.n. on weapons of mass destruction that no one could find? those are failures of intelligence. this may have been a failure of intelligence, it was corrected very quickly, it had terrible consequences, some americans were killed, including the u.s. ambassador. but it was by no means in the same league as the war in iraq. >> lynn? >> i want to quickly point out, the problem is what happened in the lead-up to the terrible murders in libya. not whether ambassador rice had a, had a bad explanation after the fact. what congress is doing is looking at why this happened. it could have been prevented. the appearance of ambassador rice on the sunday shows misspeaking, not good. but let's keep our eye on the ball on what the real problem is. >> lynn, bill, stand by. we'll be talking with you a little later in the hour. thank you so much for your perspective on this issue, this hour. this soon-to-be freshman congressman learned the hard way, it's tough to be a new kid on the block. why he literally
writing a letter to president obama opposing the idea of nominating the current u.n. ambassador to the united nations, susan rice, to secretary of state. it feels like on the domestic front we have a fiscal cliff and we're going to work things out, but there's still a lot of kind of opposition and you can hear in mccain's voice a dislike for where the president is heading. what does the republican party do now? cut deals? where do they go? we know where they went after 2008. they unified against obama. it worked for them in 2010. why did it not work in 2012? >> i think both sides will have to consolidate their bases. find out how much leeway each side has. and then they can come to the table and say, all right, can we raise rates or raise are revenue a little bit. can we cut -- how much can we cut entitlements? how much will the two sides be able to give and i think though you see in john boehner and in president obama two people who are willing to work together if they can get the wings, the fringe wings of either side to kind of get onboard and come together. >> you know, one
. the un, everybody involved. egypt trying to broker peace also. what does the president need to do to move this process forward? >> he needs to get engaged. he needs to get engaged very seriously. i was struck this morning by looking at the papers, at the consensus expressed by "the washington post" editorial, which is very good, sometimes i disagree with them, but it's very good today, and a couple columnists on the op-ed page, and they all say the same thing which i endorse. namely, this is a real challenge to get at the heart of the problems. if we simply patch this up, somehow or other, between hamas and israel, be if we still patch it up a little bit between the palestinian authority and israel, we'll have a repetition in no time flat. but in the meantime two things are happening in the region, which are not going to be reversed easily. u.s. influence is declining, arab radicalism is intensifying. and that's not a good thing either for stability or the future of israel. >> how does the president engage most constructively to try to reverse at least one of those two trends to stop the
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)